More Data or Better Data? A Statistical Decision Problem

Author:

Dominitz Jeff1,F. Manski Charles2

Affiliation:

1. Resolution Economics

2. Department of Economics and Institute for Policy Research, Northwestern University

Abstract

AbstractWhen designing data collection, crucial questions arise regarding how much data to collect and how much effort to expend to enhance the quality of the collected data. To make choice of sample design a coherent subject of study, it is desirable to specify an explicit decision problem. We use the Wald framework of statistical decision theory to study allocation of a budget between two or more sampling processes. These processes all draw random samples from a population of interest and aim to collect data that are informative about the sample realizations of an outcome. They differ in the cost of data collection and the quality of the data obtained. One may incur lower cost per sample member but yield lower data quality than another. Increasing the allocation of budget to a low-cost process yields more data, while increasing the allocation to a high-cost process yields better data. We initially view the concept of “better data” abstractly and then fix attention on two important cases. In both cases, a high-cost sampling process accurately measures the outcome of each sample member. The cases differ in the data yielded by a low-cost process. In one, the low-cost process has non-response and in the other it provides a low-resolution interval measure of each sample member’s outcome. In these settings, we study minimax-regret sample design for prediction of a real-valued outcome under square loss; that is, design which minimizes maximum mean square error. The analysis imposes no assumptions that restrict the unobserved outcomes. Hence, the decision maker must cope with both the statistical imprecision of finite samples and the partial identification of the true state of nature.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Economics and Econometrics

Cited by 14 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3